Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what provision universities are required to make for students who need to repeat a year or pause their studies due to (1) ill health, (2) having caring responsibilities, and (3) a pregnancy; and to what extent the Department for Education expects universities to make equal provision for such students in cases where the university concerned decided to close down a department part of the way through the degree course for any student concerned.
Answered by Baroness Berridge
The Office for Students (OfS) is responsible for safeguarding standards within the sector. It ensures that the Department for Education works collaboratively with the sector to make sure that it acts in the best interests of students. The regulatory framework is designed to ensure that higher education providers are: providing value for money for students; are taking action to improve access and participation; and they have student protection plans in place in case of any market failure.
My right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Education’s guidance to the OfS sets out that student interests should be central to the mission of the OfS and that the OfS should promote a positive higher education experience.
In relation to the student experience, the government has asked the OfS to promote providers’ active engagement with the welfare and wellbeing of students and in particular encourages measures to support student mental health.
Undergraduate students who are required to repeat a year of study on their course due to compelling personal reasons (e.g. illness, ill health or pregnancy) can apply for an additional year of tuition fee loan and living costs support from Student Finance England for their repeat year of study.
Undergraduate students who suspend their studies due to illness, caring responsibilities or pregnancy can apply to Student Finance England to continue paying their living costs support during their period of absence.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what progress they have made on their commitments given to co-ordinate and fund community-based English language provision made in their Integrated Communities Action Plan published in February; whether they intend to respond to Refugee Action’s campaign Let Refugees Learn and the recommendations in its report Turning words into action, published in June; and what assessment they have made of the importance of refugees learning English as a driver for integration and in combatting social exclusion.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Following the commitments set out in the cross-government Integrated Communities Action Plan (attached), the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) established a new Integrated Communities English Language programme, worth £4.5 million, in April 2019. It will deliver community-based English language learning in 2019-20 for over 19,000 learner places. In addition, MHCLG has committed £1.2 million to support 8 local authorities to deliver coordination models through the Integrated Communities English Language Coordination Fund.
The government recognises that learning English is essential to enabling refugees to rebuild their lives. We are working across government to develop a new strategy for English for speakers of other languages in 2019. This strategy will provide a shared vision for all publicly funded English language provision and this will include addressing the needs of refugees. We will consider the ‘Turning Words into Action’ report as we develop the strategy.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Viscount Younger of Leckie on 28 February (HL13946), whether there are regulations that cover the reversal of prior conditional offers of places to students who were subsequently deemed to have satisfied previously advertised admissions criteria for their intended course; if so, what they are; and whether recommendations were made to the Office for Students to the effect that students whose offer of a place on their intended course had been reversed should instead be unconditionally offered a place on a different course at the same institution, for which the student concerned had not originally applied.
Answered by Viscount Younger of Leckie - Shadow Minister (Work and Pensions)
There are no such regulations, and no recommendations have been made to the Office for Students (OfS) to that effect.
In relation to undergraduate admissions, once an offer has been made and accepted by a prospective student, a contract is formed between the higher education provider and the student. This is certainly the view of the Competition and Markets Authority, as set out on page 31 of its guidance to higher education providers on consumer law dated 12 March 2015, and it is already a condition of registration imposed by the OfS that registered providers must give due regard to relevant guidance on how to comply with consumer law. Given this, we do not see the need for any additional regulation to protect students against the potential withdrawal of an offer they have already accepted.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Viscount Younger of Leckie on 20 February (HL13570), what regulations are in place to ensure that Higher Education institutions maintain high standards of accuracy and transparency in correspondence with external stakeholders, especially correspondence relating to offers for study on a deferred basis.
Answered by Viscount Younger of Leckie - Shadow Minister (Work and Pensions)
While higher education institutions have autonomy over admissions, the vast majority of undergraduate applications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are handled by the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) on behalf of those institutions. As the shared admissions service, UCAS offers support to universities and colleges in this area through their services. It is also in institutions’ interests to keep accurate and transparent records of applications and admission. The Office for Students, as the independent regulator of higher education, also has a legal responsibility to ensure that registered institutions are acting in the best interests of students, including support in access to higher education.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Viscount Younger of Leckie on 20 February (HL13570), whether the recommendations they made to the Office for Students to reduce the numbers of unconditional offers included reversing prior offers of places to students who already satisfied previously advertised admissions criteria.
Answered by Viscount Younger of Leckie - Shadow Minister (Work and Pensions)
The Department for Education has not made any recommendations to the Office for Students (OfS) to reverse prior offers of places to students who already satisfied previously advertised admissions criteria.
We have made clear to the OfS that they should use the full range of powers at their disposal to take action where an institution cannot justify their rising numbers of unconditional offers. However, we recognise that where a student already has relevant entry level qualifications, and for some creative arts subjects, unconditional offers may be justified. Admissions are a matter of institutional autonomy but we expect universities to make their admissions criteria fair, accessible and transparent.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the answer by the Minister for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation on 28 March 2018 (HC Deb, col 408WH) about unconditional university offers and autonomy over admissions, what data they hold on the number of students with offers for study at British universities with admission for deferred entry who were contacted by the Admissions and Access Service of those universities to indicate that they would no longer be offered their intended course; what assessment they have made of the cost implications that such decisions hold for each prospective student who as a result may be obliged to pursue their intended studies further afield; and what compensatory arrangements they consider to be appropriate for the failure to honour such places offered to students who satisfied previously advertised admissions criteria.
Answered by Viscount Younger of Leckie - Shadow Minister (Work and Pensions)
Higher Education institutions are independent, autonomous bodies. As such, they are responsible for their own admissions decisions.
Data on the number of applicants with offers for deferred entry who were no longer offered their intended course is not held centrally. Consequently, no assessment has been made of the cost implications to prospective students in this scenario.
We are concerned by the steep rise in the number of unconditional offers being made to students. Where institutions cannot justify the rising numbers being offered we have made clear to the Office for Students that they should use the full range of powers at their disposal to take action. We expect universities to act responsibly when setting admissions criteria and expect admissions to be fair, accessible and transparent.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the finding of the report by the Henry Jackson Society Extreme Speakers and Events: In the 2017–18 Academic Year, published on 21 January, that SOAS University of London has hosted 70 events that were addressed by extremist speakers; whether they have discussed that report with SOAS; if so, what was the outcome of any such discussions; and what steps they intend to take in response.
Answered by Viscount Younger of Leckie - Shadow Minister (Work and Pensions)
There is no place for extremism in our society and extremist views should be exposed and challenged.
The Department for Education has not engaged with any institutions, including SOAS University of London, in relation to the Henry Jackson Society report.
The government believes that free speech should been encouraged, provided that it is within the law as it encourages debate and understanding. Challenging extremist speakers and events is an important part of tackling extremist narratives. However, this does not mean closing down lawful speech, but rather ensuring the right steps are taken to counter extremist narratives and make sure that those who wish to spread hatred do not go unchallenged.
The Prevent duty requires higher education institutions to ensure they have mitigated the risk of extremist speakers spreading harmful narratives before an event can go ahead.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission is developing new guidance on freedom of speech in higher education, which will be published shortly.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many children were in care in the last 12 months; how many were adopted during that period; what was the average waiting time for adoption applications to be processed; and what percentage of children currently awaiting adoption have been waiting for longer than 18 months.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Figures showing the position for children looked after at 31 March 2018 will be published on the 15 November 2018.
The latest figures show that the number of children who were looked after as at 31 March 2017 was 72,670.
There were 4,350 looked after children adopted during the year ending 31 March 2017. In that period, the average time between the decision the child should be placed for adoption and the child being matched to adopters was eight months. These figures were published in 2017 in table A1, E1 and E2 of the statistical release ‘Children looked after in England including adoption: 2016 to 2017 (SFR 50/2017)’ at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/children-looked-after-in-england-including-adoption-2016-to-2017.
Some 2,580 children had a placement order but had not been placed for adoption as at 31 March 2017. 18 per cent (or 460 children) had been waiting 18 months or more since the adoption decision. Figures on the number and percentage of children categorised by other waiting times are published in table E4 of the above statistical publication.
Asked by: Lord Alton of Liverpool (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they intend to commission a review of adoption and fostering policy.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Since 2010 we have taken significant steps to review and reform the way that fostering and adoption services are delivered.
In 2016 ‘Adoption: a vision for change’ was published which set out the government’s plans to address challenges in the adoption system over the following four years.
In July 2018 we published ‘Fostering better outcomes’ which set out the government commitments to improve the fostering system, in response to the Education Select Committee report into fostering and ‘Foster care in England’, an independent review published in January 2018.
We are committed to delivering the commitments set out in these reports, in order to help us to drive improvements across children’s social care.